Sweatshops, the Essential Elements for Countries and Supply Chains Inexpensive clothing has been the major trend due to the cheap laboring in Asia. Though we take granted for inexpensive clothes, we know little about how those clothes are made. In some manufacturing factories, people have died because of the companies’ neglects on maintaining buildings, providing equipment for better production and improving the working environment. Some factories use children for even lower wages. Sweatshops are the manufacturing factories with low wage, long working hours and poor conditions; they violate human rights and are unethical. Knowing this, should companies stop laboring in developing countries? The answer is no. In short, sweatshops are necessary parts of supply chains that fulfill the demands for jobs. Because sweatshops provide cheap labor and make inexpensive products available, those companies should be responsible for the welfare of the …show more content…
Since developed countries have employed Chinese laborers and introduced our technology, some areas in China are one of the most industrialized regions. When considering this fact that these laboring including sweatshops has helped develop the country, it is morally acceptable to think sweatshops are essential roles in production. According to the World Bank, the Chinese GDP growth annual rate is 6.9% in 2014 in comparison to the growth rate of -27.3% in 1991 (GDP Growth (annual %)). Despite the rapid increase in the Chinese population, its growth rate has been escalated up and kept up with the growing population. The current life is more developed than what the older generation used to live in. Severe laboring might exhaust people back then, but thanks to that, those countries became wealthier and people live in better life. This concludes that although there is a controversy about Asian laboring, it benefits their future
Introduction Have you ever imagined working in a place where employees are subjected to dangerous working conditions, including unfair salaries and arbitrary punishments, such as physical and mental abuse? Since the hourly rate of sweatshop workers is less than their everyday expenses, these workers never have a chance to improve their quality of life. Ken Silverstein’s 2010 magazine article “Shopping for Sweat: The human cost of a two-dollar T-Shirt” outlines the harsh working conditions for many garment workers living in Cambodia. The topics discussed are slavery, ethical sourcing, public relations, productivity, poverty, and competitiveness.
Time and time again, there have been opposing views on just about every single possible topic one could fathom. From the most politically controversial topics of gun control and stem cell research to the more mundane transparent ones of brown or white rice and hat or no hat—it continues. Sweatshops and the controversy surrounding them is one that is unable to be put into simplistic terms, for sweatshops themselves are complex. The grand debate of opposing views in regards to sweatshops continues between two writers who both make convincing arguments as to why and how sweatshops should or should not be dealt with. In Sweat, Fire and Ethics, by Bob Jeffcott, he argues that more people ought to worry less about the outer layers of sweatshops and delve deeper into the real reason they exist and the unnecessariness of them. In contrast, Jeffrey D. Sachs writes of the urgent requirement of sweatshops needed during the industrialization time in a developing country, in his article of Bangladesh: On the Ladder of Development. The question is then asked: How do sweatshops positively and negatively affect people here in the United States of America and in other countries around the world?
Bob Jeffcott supports the effort of workers of the global supply chains in order to win improved wages and good working conditions and a better quality of life of those who work on sweatshops. He mentions and describes in detail how the conditions of the sweatshops are and how the people working in them are forced to long working hours for little money. He makes the question, “we think we can end sweatshops abuses by just changing our
Almost everyone knows sweatshops are not acceptable places to work or support. Sweatshops, per definition from the International Labor Organization are organizations that violate more than two labor laws (Venkidaslam). There are several arguments against sweatshops. First, is that these organizations exploit their workers. They provide them low wages and some pay below the minimum wage of the home nation. Moreover, these workers are forced to work more than 60 hours per week and are mandated to work overtime. In addition, workers are subjected to unsafe environments and sexual abuse. Finally, sweatshops are known for their child labor, where children below the legal working age are paid extremely small wages. Anyone who is against sweatshops will say, choosing to partner with these organizations are unethical.
Sweatshops greatly impact the lives of people all across the world; people are forced into incredibly tough labor along with unbearable working conditions. According to the writer of English Blog, “22 million children die annually due to the hazardous conditions in the sweatshops.” (English Blog RSS) Besides the low pay and awfully long working hours, the
They often use child labor, lack workers’ benefits, and use intimidation as means of controlling workers (Boal, Mark). Typically, sweatshops are found in developing countries, however, they are also a prevalent problem in many first world countries including the United States. Many manufacturers claim that sweatshops exist in order to keep prices down for consumers, while allowing profit. On the contrary, there is also substantial evidence that goes against these beliefs. For instance, a study showed that while doubling the wage of sweatshop workers would increase consumer price by 1.8%, consumers are willing to pay 15% more with the assurance that the product was made with fair labor (11 Facts About). This, however, is a hard argument seeing as the circumstance was hypothetical and if prices were actually raised, there is no way to assure that consumers would react the same way. Either way, both sides of the argument can agree that the conditions are not good, it is just a matter of analysing the cost vs. the benefit to determine their necessity. This leads to several questions: Are sweatshops a necessary evil, how could they be abolished, and what realistic goals regarding the bettering of worker conditions can be met? Through the answering of these questions, it is easy to see that despite claims of sweatshops bringing opportunities to
Sweatshops have been around for centuries, beginning around the late 1880’s. Sweatshops are classified by three main components, long work hours, very low pay and unsafe and unhealthy working environments. Sweatshops are usually found in manufacturing industries and the most highlighted production is clothing corporations, who take full advantage of the low production costs of their products. Many may think sweatshops are a thing of the past but they are still affecting many lives across the nations. There are many ways sweatshops affect lives, but a recent article titled “New study finds ‘more sweatshops than Starbucks’ in Chicago” explains that there are many low wage industry jobs that are violating labor laws in the United States alone. The article also reports how employees who are working in such conditions won’t speak up in fear of the retaliation employers will implement. Analyzing Sweatshops through the lens of the Sociological perspectives will help us better understand the illegal conditions of workplaces that still exist today.
I. Claim 1: Sweatshops increase the standards of living for the workers and their communities
A majority of the clothing worn and purchased today in the United States has been manufactured overseas in sweatshops. Since the beginning of factories and businesses, owners have always looked for a way to cut production costs while still managing to produce large quantities of their product. It was found that the best way to cut costs was to utilize cheap labor in factories known as sweatshops. According to the US General Account Office, sweatshops are defined as a “business that regularly violates both wage or child labor and safety or health laws”. These sweatshops exploit their workers in various ways: making them work long hours in dangerous working conditions for little to no pay. Personally, I believe that the come up and employment of these sweatshops is unethical, but through my research I plan to find out if these shops produce more positive than negatives by giving these people in need a job despite the rough conditions.
The author makes two claims to support the idea that cheap labor is needed. In the first claim, the author argues that "sweatshops lead to success". He/she supports the claim by stating that "every prosperous country" has to under go a "cheap labor" temporary period but in the end they turn into a good rich economy, like China. Adding on, the author states that, "a country must be able to afford to ban child labor before child labor is pulled out from under it". In the second claim he supports it by saying that "Third world countries meed the advantage of cheap labor" by claiming that all of these prosperous countries started with child and cheap labor. Both claims support the argument that cheap labor is needed in order to
Sweatshops a big issue in today’s society, even though their existence can sometimes stay hidden from the public’s eye. A famous author named Berry states, “ most of us get all the things we need by buying them and most of us know only vaguely, if at all, where those things came from; and most of us know not at all what damage is involved in their production. We are almost entirely dependent on an economy of which we are almost entirely ignorant.” The majority of people in the US have no idea where the clothes they are purchasing are actually coming from. Most people would not support the exploitation of their own race of people. If they were able to see and come to realization about what is actually happening they would have a much different change of heart.
I. Claim 1: Sweatshops increase the standards of living for the workers and their communities
Imagine a world where trade was not allowed. If someone wanted an apple, then they would have to wander until they found an apple seed, plant and grow the tree using the rain they gathered from hand-made cups or barrels, and wait for years until the tree brought forth fruit. In order to build a house, this person would have to cut down trees with an axe that they forged and built themselves, then they would have to make mud to hold the lumber together so that they could build the house. Forget about electricity, cars, cell phones, most modern technology, because none of these things would be possible without trade. Fortunately, we live in a time when trade is widely accepted across the world. Charles Wheelan, an international economist, notes
Nicholas Kristof lived in East Asia for many years and observed how living standards improved because of sweatshops. He also made an observation in his wife’s hometown in southern China. Other articles written by Kristof about sweatshops and many other contentious topics, makes him a credible writer for on the topic.
Most of the clothes that people wear every day in America were more likely made in sweatshops. Sweatshops are factories, and they exist in most countries, especially in third world countries. Sweatshops are usually crowded with many workers into small tenement rooms, poorly ventilated, and prone to fires and rat infestation. Products that commonly come from sweatshops are carpets, cotton, garments, cocoa, coffee, toys, and furniture. The danger of sweatshops are affecting many people around the world including men, women and young children. Sweatshops violates more than two of the labor laws, and they exploit many workers by offering them very low wages that could barely pay for food to survive, and they make